tumnus

Yes, it was the mechanical turk solution.

What a sad reply to a useful site! The all-capsness of "NO national parks, NO..." etc. presumes that this specific list of designations are necessary for a hike to have value. If you had only remembered the Appalachian Trail, maybe your perspective would have shifted. And as others have pointed out, hiking in CT (and really all of New England) is quite varied, beautiful and accessible . Perhaps you should come try it sometime, it may change your view!

It can be both. And, I know some animators who consider Disneyland to be something of a monument itself.

They are certainly similar, but if you're choosing Peanuts as your main example of a comic strip that reuses some standard formatting... you're forgetting that in addition to the art, there's also decades of character and world building. Of course memes serve a similar function in terms of a multiple panel joke structure but there's a profound difference between those two at a core level. Maybe not so much with a Garfield or Beetle Bailey, though!

The word "them" has been used for centuries in cases where the writer may want to refer to a subject, or subjects, of no specific gender. I wonder why it's suddenly bothering you.

I suspect the person you are responding to is suggesting that these culture war issues are merely meant to distract from the real problem, which is wealth inequality. Many of the people worried about 'moral fabric' are fine with divorce and sexual assault (and will vote for politicians with these compromised moral values) but are also concerned about trans athletes who by most metrics comprise less that .01% of all athletes.

Let's add 'Murmurer' to that list

Your opinion isn't popular, but I agree with you. Taking just the first image as an example... this is a digital recreation/modification of a Saul Steinberg cover for the New Yorker originally done in 1976. This cover created a extremely popular subgenre of stylized map drawing at the time, but the Mac version looks like mostly clip art images all splodged together with no real sense of composition or perspective. There are many other examples in here which I feel were made by people who happened to have access to the technology, but did not necessarily have great artistic ability.

That being said, although there are also some extremely good examples in here (in my subjective opinion), I absolutely think there is a nostalgia element at play. I worked on these machines in the 80s and feel that nostalgia myself.

That is interesting, although the originals are more convincing! Not least because (as you point out) the grain and blur of the original photos aren't matched.

This is exactly why Terry Gilliam named his production company Poo Poo Pictures. He liked the idea of studio executives having to ask their assistants "Did the Poo Poo memo come in yet?"

"E.T. is not green. I'm really surprised that this isn't a common complaint. We'll fix that as well."

ET isn't green in the movie. Why would this be a common complaint?

72 out of around 128 million is about %0.005 which indeed does not seem like a lot.

This is a highly questionable list, and not only because it recommends 'Freakonomics' (I suggest listening to the 'If Books could Kill' podcast about this book - their analysis is really on point).

In regards to the rest of the list - just as a single example more or less at random, re: Jordan Belfort's book:

"proven to turn anyone into a sales-closing, money-earning rock star..."

There are at least three lies in this half-sentence alone.

Kurt Vonnegut did it first.

The humor doesn't quite hit - it feels a little over-aggressive and not clever, but the details in the article are accurate and well organized.

KCRW out of Santa Monica is an extremely good station. But,like most, probably the exception that proves the rule.

The first endorsement on the page is by the notorious fraudster Deepak Chopra. Probably enough of a reason to avoid purchasing.

This really was peak marketing idiocy. I knew people who worked at Cartoon Network at the time. Jim Samples' disconnect and subsequent resignation reverberated down the ranks and tanked a lot of careers and projects. Who would think that strapping battery operated devices to bridges with duct tape in any post-9/11 city would be a good idea?

But only to a point, correct? Otherwise we end up in the current dialogue where flat earthers, moon landing deniers, and a large percentage of religious believers feel more platformed than ever. It's far too easy for the uninformed to challenge science simply because it challenges their non-scientific beliefs.

Next Sunday A.D.

"She craved dopamine, a chemical released by the brain that exacerbated by her ADHD."

editors, please

This must be a specific cultural thing. In my group of friends and family, generous offers like those used in the examples aren't seen as 'tacky'. They're just generous and speak to a spirit of wanting to share.

And in the end - why is this a bad thing, to be distracted? If it’s in our nature in the first place?

But is it indeed in our nature? That comment assumes: if a condition exists, then that condition is correct. But, for example, it's in our nature to overload on sugar and fats, but that's not a healthy way to live.

Any citations for this claim?

Yep, not true at all. My solution has been to just stick to smaller/niche subreddits that appeal to my interests but stay rather small. And I can (anecdotally) say that the majority of them are apolitical.

that's a really interesting find, esp. given the location

If you mean obfuscating an answer to a plainly asked question, you might be correct ;>

You can read about it here: http://web.mit.edu/policies/9/9.5.html